cultural capital in the economic field: a study of relationships in … · 2018. 6. 2. · cultural...

Cultural Capital in the Economic Field: A Studyof Relationships in an Art Market

Lars Vigerland1 & Erik A. Borg1

Published online: 12 June 2017# The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication

Abstract In this study of an economic field and its relationships to a cultural field, we applyPierre Bourdieu’s central concepts of economic capital, cultural capital, symbolic capital andfield, and thus follow in a tradition that at the outset was considered to be post-structuralism,but which by Bourdieu later has been brought into the realm of realism. We have mappedrelationships between the actors and thus the field structures that these relationships entail. Thefields in which a segment of an art world is operating is represented in multi-dimensionalfigures which illustrate relationships and bonds between the different categories of organiza-tions. Some of the business actors we have studied are engaging in cultural activities with agreat deal of autonomy, others are connected to the cultural field in less active ways. Inparticipating in the cultural field they are in different ways and to different extents accumu-lating symbolic capital including prestige and honor. The method we have applied is multiplecorrespondence analysis which was frequently used by Bourdieu.

Keywords Bourdieu . Correspondence analysis . Cultural capital . Economic capital . Field .

Multiple correspondence analysis . Symbolic capital

Introduction

The main purpose of this article is to analyze a business field and its interaction andrelationships to actors in an art market and to art, thus an art field. We have studied the marketfor art in the Stockholm region. In doing so we have applied central aspects of PierreBourdieu’s concepts of field and capital. Significant aspects of field and capital theory canbe found in Bourdieu’s Distinction (1986a) and significant aspects of cultural theory can befound in Bourdieu’s two books The Field of Cultural Production (1983) and in The Rules ofArt (1996a). These books represent central parts of Bourdieu’s theory of understanding field,

Philosophy of Management (2018) 17:169–185DOI 10.1007/s40926-017-0061-2

* Erik A. [email protected]

1 School of Business, Department of Social Sciences, Sodertorn University, Alfred Nobels Alle 9,14189 Huddinge, Sweden

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s40926-017-0061-2&domain=pdf

capital and media production. Cultural production entails in this work a very broad under-standing of culture in line with classical sociology which entails all social science including allexpressive-aesthetic, literature and art (Hesmondhalgh 2006, pp. 211–212). With this broaddefinition of culture in mind we have set out to interpret positions of actors in a specificbusiness field and in a cultural field, and the degree to which they are autonomous of eachother. In doing so we are applying the methodology of correspondence analysis to a greatextent used and developed by Bourdieu. In his research, Bourdieu developed and usedmultiple correspondence analysis to produce a range of figures that are associated with centralconcepts of culture.

Bourdieau is relevant to our way of study as his works Bblend the full range of sociologicalstyles, from painstakingly ethnographic accounts to sophisticated mathematical modelling tohighly abstract metatheoretical and philosophical arguments^ (Wacquant 1989, p. 27). Again,the use of mathematics is not positivist in nature (Merquior 1985). In his early work Bourdieauseeks to solve the conflict between objectivism and subjectivism through a Bstructuralistconstructivism or a constructivist structuralism^ (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992, p. 11).Researchers like Giddens (1984) and Archer (2000) later place the research represented byBourdieu firmly in a realist tradition or by Fowler (1996) more specifically within enrichedrealism, not least in the way he addresses the duality between agentic and structural explana-tions of social phenomena. An essential contribution to management and organization researchcan be drawn from Bourdieu’s writings as it is: (i) offering a conceptual framework formultilevel research agenda in organization and management studies, (ii) is presenting anepistemological and methodological framework for tackling issues of reflexivity in the re-search process, and (iii) is proposing a methodological and epistemological way to overcomethe dualism between structure and agency, and objectivism and subjectivism (Özbilgin andTatli 2005. We have applied Bourdieu’s methodology as it is able to connect the concepts offield, cultural-, economic- and symbolic capital, and display these connections in graphicalforms. This methodology is more thoroughly described in the methodology section of thisarticle.

The aim of this study expressed in more detail is to analyze profit-oriented corporaterelationships and linkages with non-profit oriented organizations working with art, and alsoto analyze profit-oriented corporate possessions of art. In doing so we are working in theintersection between art and business on the one hand and aesthetics and science on the other.Our analysis has been carried out with the theoretical concepts of Bourdieu. The termorganizations is used as a broader term for the actors involved with art, as these actors areof diverse organizational nature, such as established businesses, foundations, trusts,institutions.

Arts Marketing

Arts marketing has over the recent years developed as a separate sub-discipline of marketingwhere some of the theoretical underpinnings are different from mainstream marketing. Con-sumers’ aesthetic experiences can be examined within philosophical, psychological and socialscience perspectives (Charters 2006). Businesses and corporations have discovered art mar-keting as an opportunity for corporate social development. At the same time, art is representingpossibilities for social inclusion, community development and urban regeneration (Kerriganet al. 2009). This dual role of art has eloquently been analyzed by Schroeder (2006) in a study

170 Philosophy of Management (2018) 17:169–185

of art as a commodity culture and simultaneously as an alleviated conception of aesthetics andart. A distinction can be made between the integration of aesthetics into everyday consumptionand the construction of meaning and identity. It has been pointed out that commercialinfluencers on popular culture increase as aesthetic images make their way into everydayconsumption (Venkatesh and Meamber 2008).

Aesthetic discourse in contemporary studies has come to possess different mean-ings. In studies of aesthetics in everyday consumption practices and patterns, apolitical economy approach to arts marketing has been shown to be constructive(Joy and Sherry 2004). Art can be used to create an atmosphere in an office settingand art is consumed by corporations to create an image in the workplace. Theatmosphere influences people subtly at an emotional level beyond mere rationalunderstanding (Biel-Missal 2013). Our study uses a sociological approach to art andconsumption and looks at corporations’ use of art in order to increase their culturaland economic capital.

There are several reasons why companies engage in investments in arts. O’Hagan andHarvey (2000) summarize four reasons for art sponsorship. These are: promotion of image/name; supply-chain cohesion, rent seeking and non-monetary benefits to managers andowners. One may in turn ask what the artist can offer in return to management of companiesand non-profit organizations? Art may be created for art’s sake or for business’ sake. Art mayoffer creativity which rubs of on organizations that associate with art and creates an associationwith something more alleviated than the pure commercial aspect of business (Fillis 2002).

While art by many may be seen as a business, people waffle over whether business is an art,as it has to be managed and organized to reach an audience and have an effect on it (Guillet deMonthoux 2005). We see in our research, a close relationship between art and business andthat there is a mutual benefit between art and business. Especially does marketing have anessential artistic side, and art can enhance the marketing of businesses. A sharp distinctionbetween the essential and the superfluous, the serious and the facetious, and the scientific andthe artistic, has probably lost its legitimacy. At the same time, the sprit between scientificdiscourse and aesthetic experience has faded (Strati and Guillet de Monthoux 2002). Withinthis amalgamation of art and science, we have found cultural fields which can be mapped andexpressed in geometrical terms. Scientific and artistic discourse merge in the intersectionsbetween economic and cultural fields.

Bourdieu’s Concepts of Culture

Pierre Bourdieu introduces novel and compelling concepts that helps analyzing culturalactivities and relationships between actors in the intellectual field. Few areas can be seen todemonstrate relational thinking than that of art and literature (Bourdieu 1983, p. 311).Foremost, Bourdieu represents a genuine approach to post-structuralism, as he synthesizesFrench structuralism, conflict theory and phenomenology (Holt 1997, p. 94). Bourdieu claimsthat the relationship between the artist and his work within which an act of communicationtakes place can be described as a position in the structure of an intellectual field. From thepositions of cultural actors, positional properties can be derived which corresponds to aspecific type of positional properties within the cultural field (Bourdieu 1969, p. 89). Meth-odologically, Bourdieu’s research represents what he describes as a realist construction(Bourdieu 1996b, p. 27). He analyses the interaction between the investigator and the person

Philosophy of Management (2018) 17:169–185 171

questioned as a communication in its general state where practical and theoretical problemsemerge simultaneously (Bourdieu 1996b, p. 17).

What stands in the way for an interpretation of the value of cultural goods and thecharismatic ideology of creation? Bourdieu answers this question by introducing the conceptsof habitus, capital and field (Hesmondhalgh 2006, p. 212). The definition of a field has beenoutlined as: Ba structured space of positions in which the position and their interrelations aredetermined by the distribution of different kinds of resources of capital^ (Thompson 1991, p.14). Important to the sociology of cultural production is the idea of autonomy which is centralto the account of modern culture-making. Autonomy of art is not a universal condition, butwas actively produced in the nineteenth century (Benson 1999, p. 465). What is accumulatedby autonomous actors in their habitus is symbolic capital which represents accumulatedprestige and honor (Thompson 1991, p. 14).

At the heart of the production of works of art lies competition and struggle where theimmaterial production of works of art plays a role in its symbolic production and its passing onof acclamation. In the cultural field, people and organizations struggle for the legitimacy andinfluence of their judgment. Bourdieu’s term habitus represents a system of social andenvironmental factors as well as dispositions which consciously or unconsciously direct thebehavior of those involved (de Glas 1998, p. 380).

The Concepts of Field and Capital

Bourdieu emphasizes the importance of relationships between social groups (Broady 1991)and believes that there is a social dimension in both consumption and production (Bourdieu1986a, b; Bourdieu 1992; Bourdieu 1979/2004; Broady 1991). Regarding companies operat-ing in Sweden, we can therefore distinguish between production fields and consumption fields.Within the field of production there are those actors, organizations and institutions that createtangible and symbolic assets, for example those that produce materially measurable goods andservices, as well as those that create immaterial goods with indirect or symbolic value. In thisstudy a specimen, a section or a segment of the Swedish production field of profit-orientedcompanies that have relationships with a section of the Swedish production field of non-profitoriented organizations in the field of art are studied. The term specimen or segment is usedpartly to emphasize that it does not involve a complete study of the production fields. If no full-scale field according to Bourdieu’s definition exists, instead, the term Bfield-like^ space orroom can be used. However, this room requires a structure of field-like positions. One couldconsider a social field or social room as a data projection conducted with correspondenceanalysis. The close link between theory and method is most probably the reason why Bourdieuhimself used almost exclusively correspondence analysis as his main statistical method(Postone in Bourdieu 1993a, p. 11). This paper thus studies a specimen or a segment of theproduction field, defined as a Bfield-like^ room with correspondence analysis. Furthermore,we have been inspired by Bourdieu’s theories and terminology thus working in a spirit ofBourdieu. Bourdieu believes that his theories and methods are not static, instead, he suggeststhat these should be adapted and changed relatively freely for new research areas (Bourdieufrom Bourdieu 1993a, p. 271).

The phenomena to be studied are the allocation and the concentration of capital inBourdieu’s sense, i.e. a set of tangible assets among the profit-oriented businesses as size,industry, and board composition, and the symbolic assets in terms of relationships with non-


profit oriented companies in the art field. Also the profit-oriented businesses’ art possessionsthat are exposed publicly on the premises or art possessions that are reported in annual reportsor made publicly known otherwise are studied. In this way a mapping is made possible ofdifferent distributions of material and symbolic capital where diverse assets also result indifferent symbolic assets. Thus different social clusters of consumption and production aresymbolic and both unite and differentiate. Any field is a battle field where fighting is aboutsomething that unites the actors on the field. Actors can compete for the same kind ofproduction that is going on in the field or the symbolic assets, i.e. the types of profit orientedcompanies that have established relationships with the nonprofit oriented companies in the artfield. Bourdieu’s theoretical concept then becomes essential to study the different actors’relationships and to study the fight or at least the hierarchy of the field.

In a field there may be existing organizations or specific actors. These actors are givingdifferent phenomenon value. Value that can be used by actors in a specific field. Theseorganizations are generally accepted by the actors in the field. The organizations contributeto the establishment or definition of value in the field. Such organizations are usually referredto as consecration organizations. The Museum of Photography and Carnegie Art Award wouldbe examples of such organizations that help to create artefacts or phenomena defined as art onthe art field.

The concept of field is used in this context for reasons of convenience, whereas a morecorrect term would be a Bfield-like^ room, or a room of field-like-character. The empirical datais in three different sections: i) the production field for profit-oriented companies, ii) theproduction field for non-profit oriented organizations in art, iii) the consumption field forprofit-oriented companies of art, i.e. the profit-oriented businesses’ art possessions.

Methodology

Correspondence Analysis, which is a somewhat simpler method than multiple correspondenceanalysis, are both types of factor analysis, however, with the ability to include non-hierarchicaldata. The method can include a multitude of data in the analysis and visualizes the results.Correspondence analysis is based on variations in the data. The more extreme an attribute is,the further away from the middle of the figure a variable category is found. Variable categoriesare usually called modalities in the correspondence analysis. Any Bnormal^ modality in thedata material is placed in or near the center of the figure called barycenter. The axis measuregeometric chi2 values, i.e. distance from the barycenter. The first axis measures the largestvariance in the data, the other axis measures next most, the third axis third most, etc. indecreasing importance for the explanation of what the axes measure. The position in the figurefor any modality is determined by how much this specific modality deviates compared to theother modalities in the data material. The higher the number on an axis a modality receives asits figure position, i.e. further away from the barycenter, the more abnormal the modality iscompared to the expected or normal position for modalities in the data. The modalities definewhat the axis measure and must be interpreted by the analyst (Le Roux and Rouanet 2004;Lundin 2005).

Correspondence analysis and multiple correspondence analysis have been extensively usedby the French sociologist Professor Pierre Bourdieu. Bourdieu let his conceptual apparatus tobe part of an almost symbiotic relationship with this methodology (Broady 1991). The methodwas used in La Distinction, which made Bourdieu known to a wider public, particularly after


the study was translated into English under the title Distinction (Bourdieu 1979/2004). Aconsequence of this is that the concept of field or room would be difficult to analyze usingother methods of analysis than correspondence analysis. In Bourdieu’s theories the concept offield or room is central. The field describes the relationship between the characteristics of theactors and this fact has been assumed in the analysis in this study.

Bourdieu’s concept is based on tastes or preferences. Preferences are expressed as specificattributes of the various societal participants that both unite and differentiate regarding anyspecific phenomenon, such as a market for art production, where the market can be consideredfrom a consumer or a producer perspective (Bourdieu 1979/2004; Bourdieu 1992; Bourdieu1996a, b, c, d). Bourdieu analyzed many phenomena or contexts such as academia in the workof Homo Academicus (Bourdieu 1996a, b, c, d), or the training of policy makers or eliteadministrators to the French public sector in State Nobility (Bourdieu 1996a, b, c, d/1998).What unites these works is a purpose and a method of analysis to identify different groups. Inthe above mentioned works the analysis method is not always a fully performed correspon-dence analysis, but the way of thinking is the same. The idea of attributes that unite anddifferentiate can even be carried out manually (Bourdieu 2000). A perspective that unites anddistinguishes groups, individuals or actors is thus fundamental. In analogy with the unifyingpart of the concept, there are also predispositions that repel individuals or actors from eachother such as dislike or disgust for other individuals’ or actors’ tastes or preferences. Like anddislike can thus identify clusters or groups of actors that have something in common and thatsimultaneously distinguish them from other groups. Hereafter, the term preferences will beused for reasons of simplicity. Preferences acquired in accordance with Bourdieu’s theorieseither by inheritance or environment are often, but not always, unknown to the actor.Fundamental concepts in Bourdieu’s theories are field, habitus and capital. Capital can be inthe form of material, such as financial capital or symbolic capital such as cultural capital.

The empirical data in this study may be considered as a production field according toBourdieu’s perspective, where actors’ preferences are expressed in various actual attributes.These attributes are, among others, associates to the non-profit oriented art market. This marketwill henceforth be called field and the attributes considered as capital, which represent differentactors’ ways of positioning themselves in this field. There are vital similarities with thisperspective and Bourdieu’s earlier studies such as Distinction (1979/2004). However, thesimilarity in itself is of secondary importance, as Bourdieu himself claimed that his theorieswere intended to be used in new contexts and in new ways (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992) andare not intended to be slavishly repeated in what Bourdieu himself did in his studies or in thecontexts Bourdieu chose to collect empirical data from. Bourdieu’s theories, concepts andperspective are thus intended to be used on new empirical data and in new contexts. Thepurpose of this study is therefore to apply Bourdieu’s theoretical concept and the method thatwas so often used by Bourdieu in a new Swedish context. The method of multiple correspon-dence analysis has been used in a Swedish business context before (e.g. Borg and Vigerland2013) and Bourdieu’s theoretical concept combined with this method has previously also beenused in a Swedish business context (Vigerland 2007). Bourdieu’s theoretical concept com-bined with multiple correspondence analysis is not widely used in the interface betweenbusiness and art. However, Bourdieu uses correspondence analysis, not least in his bookDistinction (Bourdieu 1986a, b) where he lists as variables several cultural dimension such asmodern art museums, abstract and impressionist paintings as well as specific painters such asKandinsky. These dimensions are related to capital and is therefore related to what we havedescribed as business related dimensions of the production and consumption of art.


Data

The empirical data consists of profit-oriented companies operating in various lines of business,and these companies’ relationships or connections to non-profit organizations in the produc-tion of art and these companies’ art possessions. A summary of the profit-oriented companiesin various lines of business is shown in the table below. The chart shows that various lines ofbusiness exist, such as law firms, banks, investment banks and manufacturing companies. It isnoteworthy that galleries, art business and auction houses are included. Galleries, art businessand auction houses are certainly active in the arts industry, but the essence is that thesecompanies are profit oriented and have at the same time any type of connection to non-profit enterprises in art production. Thus, there are two main groups: companies with profit-oriented goals in various lines of business, also including art production, and companies ororganizations, whereby for example foundations are included, with non-profit oriented goalsengaged in different kinds of art production. The objective in this study is to map and analyzethe profit-oriented companies’ relationships or connections to the art market where art itself isin focus. Art was defined very widely and includes all types of artistic activities such aspainting, theater, opera, writing, installations, etc (Table 1).

The Anatomy of an Economic Field

The economic field of the profit-oriented businesses are shown in Fig. 1. The figure is abarycentric chart and is a visualization of the multiple correspondence analysis. This figurerepresents a section of the production field of the profit-oriented corporations with attributesfrom the production field of art of non-profit oriented organizations and the consumption fieldof art of the profit-oriented corporations.

The material includes 108 profit-oriented companies and 43 non-profit oriented organiza-tions with different kinds of art activities. The fact that the non-profit oriented companiesoperating in different types of artistic activity in itself is significant, because different profit-oriented companies have different opportunities or susceptibility to various strategic relationsin the art field. Altogether 8 active variables with 27 variable categories, or modalities that it isreferred to as in the correspondence analysis, and 7 inactive, illustrative or supplementaryvariables as it is referred to in the correspondence analysis, with 76 modalities have been usedin the analysis. The active variables consist of data of i.) turnover, ii.) line of business, iii.) yearof establishment, iv.) ownership, v.) membership of any member of the board to anyestablished gentleman’s club, vi.) any member of the board being a well-known individual

Table 1 Organizations participating in the study

Frequency Percent Valid percent Cumulative percent

Valid Law firm 5 4,6 4,6 4,6Auction house 7 6,5 6,5 11,1Gallery/Art firm 14 13,0 13,0 24,1Bank 8 7,4 7,4 31,5Inv. bank 25 23,1 23,1 54,6Prod./Other 49 45,4 45,4 100,0Total 108 100,0 100,0


(celebrity), vii.) any member of the board belonging to a well-known financial family, viii.)any member of the board belonging to a family of nobility. The seven illustrative variablescontain information about any direct or indirect links to the art field. This link maps via theboard members any established cooperation with or association to actors active in the art field.One of the illustrative variables also contains information from the consumption field of art,i.e. art possessions of the profit-oriented companies such as older oil paintings, modern art andphotography.

The analysis shows that there is a division between the profit-oriented businesses based onsize. There are essentially three different polarities which are shown in Fig. 3. In order tofacilitate the comments of the various parts of the figure it is necessary to identify differentpositions in the figure so that the designations +, 0 and - are used for each axis, so that the firstterm refers to the position of axis 1 and the second term to the position on the axis 2. In thisway the figure is divided into different parts. Position designation (+, +) thus means the upperright corner, (+, 0) means the right part of axis 1, (+, −) means the lower right corner (0, −)means the lower part of axis 2, etc. The clusters or polarities labelled 1, 2 and 3 are locatedfrom the left side of the figure to the right, which can be seen in Fig. 3. Polarity 1 is orientedtoward the left side of the figure or rather the field with the center in the upper left part of thefigure (−, +). This polarity incorporates 56 companies. Polarity 2 is oriented toward the lowerleft part of the field (−, −) and this polarity incorporates 15 companies. Polarity 3 is orientedtoward the upper right part of the field (+, +) incorporating 37 companies. These threepolarities include all profit-oriented companies in the data set of 108.

Axis 1 measures mainly company size and year of establishment of the profit-orientedbusinesses; axis 2 measures line of business and the composition of the board, while axis 3,which is not shown in Fig. 1, measures ownership and characteristics of the board. Thus axis 1

Fig. 1 A visualization of the field of the profit oriented companies showing some attributes, i.e. some activevariable categories (modalities). To clarify the structure of the field the variable categories of turnover and age ofthe companies have been linked together with arrows. Please note that young companies with low turnover areoriented to the right side of the graph (+,0), and that old companies with high turnover, the opposite kind ofcompanies, to the top left corner (−,+)


measures company size, while both axes 2 and 3 provide additional and more detailedinformation. A more detailed description of the field (Fig. 3) shows that the big companies,including large turnover can be found in the upper left corner (−, +) and the smaller companiesin the right part (+, 0). Medium-sized companies are found in the field’s lower left (0, −).Similar hierarchical distribution is also apparent in other variable categories so that the oldestcompanies can be found in the upper left corner (−, +) and the youngest in the right part (+, 0).Directors of large companies are to a greater extent associated with gentlemen’s clubs.Belonging to a gentlemen’s club provides members to valuable networks and an opportunityto influence members from other parts of society as well as other companies and businesspartners.

In a Bourdieu-perspective, the big companies represent the field’s dominant participatorswith large economic capital. The economic capital consists of high turnovers and establishedpositions, partly due to the longer time span the older companies have been in operation, whilethe smaller companies hold less economic capital and lack an established position that a long-term business reputation provides. The big companies also have symbolic capital, recognizedas some board members belonging to established networks through gentlemen’s clubs. Thesegentlemen’s clubs have a formalized election process in which the candidate must be proposed.Admission and membership is often based on professional success, an influential socialposition or affiliation to a known and established family. This would in a Bourdieu-perspective be known as consecration-process, where testing is done by legitimate memberswho meet certain pre-established requirements and that serve as the guarantor of a particularsocial position. Membership of these clubs is exclusive in the sense that it is not accessible toanyone. Membership to a gentleman’s club provides the company with a good reputation viathe board member. Thus symbolic capital is created for the organization associated to themember. Memberships of gentlemen’s clubs are oriented mainly towards the left part of thefield where the large and medium-sized companies are found. In this part of the field there arealso companies with board members from established and influential families. Bourdieu wouldcall these senior families, i.e. families that have belonged to high societal positions for manygenerations. In this case a particular family name provides a symbolic capital. In the oppositepolarity of the field there are companies that could be called the dominated or some of thempossibly the challengers (avant garde). The challengers are the companies that are about to beestablished and that relatively recently started to develop a growing reputation in business.This part of the field is characterized by an absence of, or at least a limitation, of economiccapital as well as an absence of symbolic capital in the form of club affiliation between boardmembers and a lack of board members belonging to an established or known family.

The Anatomy of a Cultural Field

The cultural field consists of some of the inactive variable categories, or the illustrativemodalities. These must be understood in relation to the structure of the field of the profit-oriented companies. Examples of art organizations associated with big companies, in thefield’s upper left, is Sven Harry’s Art Museum, Carnegie Art Award, Opera Initiative andMagasin 3 / Stockholm’s Art Hall. The art exhibition hall Artipelag is oriented towardsmedium sized companies, while the Museum of Photography is oriented toward smallcompanies (Figs. 2 and 3). Photography as art possessions is oriented toward the cluster ofthe small companies.


The profit-oriented companies in the arts industry as auction houses and galleries areassociated with photography as an art form and the Museum of Photography in the art field.The connection to the Museum of Photography can be largely explained by the auction houseBukowski with its informal cooperation with the museum. These profit-oriented companies areoriented toward the polarity of the small companies. In this part of the field also law firms,manufacturing companies and other companies can be found. Traditional art is oriented towardthe center of the field, which means that this type of art possession is not characterized by any

Fig. 2 A visualization of the field of art showing some attributes (inactive modalities) of the not for profit artorganizations, showing that Carnegie Art Award, Magasin 3/Stockholm Art Hall and Sven Harry’s Art Museumare oriented toward large companies, traditional and modern art possessions are oriented toward mid-sizecompanies and Museum of Photography as well as photo as art possessions are oriented toward small companies

Fig. 3 A visualization of the cluster analysis of three clusters, where only some of the characteristics of theclusters are mentioned; 1: bank/investment bank, member from established financial family on the board,dominant family owner, high turnover, person on the board belonging to gentlemen’s club Sällskapet and/orNya Sällskapet, 2: medium turnover, person on the board belonging to gentlemen’s club Sällskapet, 3: unknownboard members, private owner, person on the board belonging to no gentlemen’s club


type of divergence in data, i.e. it is main stream art. Modern art is oriented toward smallcompanies, while both traditional and contemporary art possessions are oriented towardmedium-sized companies.

Specimen or Segments from an Economic Field and from a Cultural Field

The attributes of the profit oriented companies in relation to the non-profit oriented artorganizations are important for the structure of the field, whether the attributes are mainlydeveloped and chosen by the commercial companies themselves, by the arts organizations, orby both in collaboration.

It is possible to identify a field structure in accordance with Bourdieu’s theoretical frame-work, where there is a hierarchy and a power structure with actors. The companies arecharacterized by different accumulation of economic capital and different time since estab-lishment. The hierarchy ranges from the upper left corner with the dominating actors throughthe lower left corner of actors with intermediate positions to end up in the upper right corner ofthe dominated, or some even challengers on the field structure and field characteristics.Whether those companies that are at this moment in this sample dominated or challengersonly the future can tell. The challengers are the companies that struggle to assume futuredominant positions. Among the companies that currently occupy positions in the dominantpart of the field, there are probably some companies that will occupy dominant positions in thefuture and some dominated. A different field structure can come about by acquiring or loosingeconomic capital to the extent that these companies change from the position of dominated tothe position of dominating or vice versa. Companies’ revenues are a significant part of theireconomic capital. Although the year of establishment naturally is important for the accumu-lation of economic capital, it is also important for non-material capital, i.e. a kind of symboliccapital. An old year of establishment normally creates something positive for the brand value.Symbolic capital is another name in this context for brand value, more in line with Bourdieu’sconceptual framework.

The cooperation and the relationships with non-profit arts companies provide symbolicvalue to the profit oriented companies. These relationships are like the preferences described indifferent works by Bourdieu (e.g. Bourdieu 1979/2004). These relationships constitute attri-butes associated with specific positions in the field. The dominated, or actors with late year ofestablishment, and with low turnover are associated with attributes such as photography.Attributes associated with traditional and contemporary art possessions are located in middlepositions. These actors are to some extent related to photography, like the Museum ofPhotography. There are thus some modalities that to some extent are in common for boththe middle position and for the dominated position.

The large and established companies consist of categories like Binvestment banks^. One ofthese investments banks is Carnegie with relations to BCarnegie Art Award^. This award canbe regarded as a strategy for e.g. the investment bank Carnegie to participate in the legitimi-zation of art. This relatively large and more than 200 year old investment bank, thus with alarge amount of symbolic capital, has direct links to and power over the Carnegie Art Award,which would be regarded as cultural capital.

From a Bourdieu-perspective the investment bank Carnegie belongs to the dominant part ofthe economic field. By active participation in the art field, Carnegie takes part in a legitimationof specific works of art and artists. The Carnegie Art Award is an institution that cannot be


ignored in the Swedish art field. It is a so-called consecration organization with a purpose toprovide hallmarks to point to the legitimate art, the art to be given value on the art field.Carnegie’s economic capital also manifests itself in the economic values of the Carnegie ArtAward. The Carnegie Art Award prize competition among contemporary Nordic artistsprovides a first prize of 1 million SEK (ca 120,000 $), the second prize of 600,000 SEK (ca70,000 $) and the third prize of 400,000 SEK (50,000 $). The prize money is in an art contextunique and is the highest prize in Scandinavia. The prize winners also participate in anexhibition tour of the Nordic capitals (Carnegie Art Award 2015). For the artists the pricethus also gives an important opportunity for promotion, even though the artists themselveshardly would express themselves in those terms (Gustavsson et al. 2012).

The Carnegie Art Award is however not entirely uncontroversial. There is astruggle for the legitimate consecration organizations that charges art, artworks, andartists with value that is viable in the art field. The fight for legitimate value of thespecific field is symptomatic of the struggle that prevails on any field. The CarnegieArt Award prize has been talked about in the art field as vulgar and it has beenperceived as absurd that an investment bank would have the ability to participate inthe art field’s affairs. When the prize was introduced in 1998 it was criticized forbeing vulgar. However, as time went on most of the criticism has declined. Oneimportant reason for this is most probably the fact that the members of the jury areselected among established artists from the art field itself. Today, the Carnegie ArtAward is one of the important institutions in the Swedish art field (e.g. Stockholm2014; Lenas 2014; Konsten.net 2012; Vilks.net 2011). The investment bank Carnegiedonates money and supports operations in the Carnegie Art Award, but interferes inno way in its work, which most probably is a very informed choice. The Carnegie ArtAward is a very obvious relationship and cooperation, even partnership, between twovery different production fields, the economic field, on the one hand and the art fieldon the other. On the basis of field logic such cooperation is however not withoutchallenges.

The economic field has its logic with intrinsic values consisting of, for example, revenuegenerating economic capital, while the art field considers questions such as what constitutesgood art. The art field is also involved in definitions of art from the perspective of differentactivities such as visual art, video art, performance art, etc. The art field is most probablysignificantly more sensitive to Bcontamination^ from the economic field than vice versa. Anartist who is too commercial will face difficulties in being accepted as a good artist and thusface difficulties in accumulating any value that is recognized as important and appreciated inthe art field. (Gustavsson et al. 2012) Values in the art field are essentially symbolic, whilevalues in the economic field are essentially material. Carnegie is located in one of the threepolarities of the field where art is defined by a Carnegie associate, its partner Carnegie ArtAward in the art field. The Carnegie Art Award is undeniably an important institution in the artfield and Carnegie is a major player in the economic field.

A dependence on strong owner families becomes apparent in the field in variable categoriessuch as board composition and dominant owner families. These categories are mainly orientedtowards the polarity with large companies. A heterogeneous board composition is orientedtoward the large company cluster.

The second polarity, which occupies an intermediate position between the other twopolarities or clusters, is characterized by more modest efforts in the art field. This cluster isassociated with art possessions that are relatively traditional, i.e. traditional and contemporary


art. This intermediate position excels neither in the art field nor in the economic field. Theactors in this cluster adopt a cautious approach and it is as consumers of art that they act in thefield of art.

The third polarity is associated with small companies that have applied a strategy to placephotography as a fully legitimate art form among the more traditional art. In that perspectivesome of the smaller companies will be the future challengers of art. Although photography inmost sets is regarded as an acceptable form of art, it can still be regarded with some reluctance.The challengers redefine the field structure and in this case the definition of art. Photography asa relatively new art form have some substantial resources from companies such as the auctionhouse Bukowski and the oil company Vostok Nafta. The consecration of art can be handledthrough an institutionalization as the example of Carnegie and Carnegie Art Award for modernyet mainly traditional art, and on the other hand the Museum of Photography which aim tolaunch and establish the relatively new art form. Photography, as a somewhat less expensiveform of art possession is oriented toward small companies. It is worth noting that no identifiedart possessions are oriented toward the absolute field center (i.e. the barycentric center of thefigure).

The Museum of Photography and Bukowski have a direct need for each other. Photographyas an art form is relatively new as stated before. To establish this new art form as acceptable inthe art field, it is important to introduce photography as art, for instance by creating similarinstitutions as in other art forms. The Museum of Photography is an institution of consecrationfor photography, just as Carnegie Art Award is an institution of consecration for moretraditional art. The Museum of Photography is therefore part of a strategy to transformphotography from a way to preserve family memories only to an established and recognizedart form. The Museum of Photography was established in 2010. On the homepage it isindicated that the museum has a bright future and that photography is an art form for everyone.(Fotografiska 2015) The auction house Bukowski is in this context the profit-oriented orga-nization that has directly benefited from the establishment of photography as an art form. Inrecent years, sales of photography has increased considerably at Bukowski auctions. Ifphotography would not be defined as art, it could naturally not be for sale at the auctions atBukowski. Thus the Museum of Photography is important for Bukowski to define photogra-phy as a recognized and legitimate art form, something that contains value on the art field.Accordingly the Museum of Photography is in need of Bukowski. Photographs traded at theBukowski auctions fetch considerable amount of money and should thus be accorded asymbolic, cultural value. This cultural capital is the cornerstone of the museum’s entireexistence.

A systematic way to analyze the material and its polarities is to conduct a cluster analysis.The principle behind this analysis is to find characteristics of the companies for apredetermined number of subsets. The cluster analysis that is displayed below confirms thethree polarities of the correspondence analysis.

Conclusions

Bourdieu has been considered to be perhaps the most influential social theorist of the secondhalf or the twentieth century (Throop and Murphy 2002). He has made profound contributionsto both philosophy and sociology. His formal educational training was in philosophy, and notin sociology or anthropology (Robbins 2002). Bourdieu fought with all means against the neo-


liberal turn, and had a focus in his work on social practice (Callewaert 2006). Some of his keyconcepts were habitus, misrecognition and the logic of practice, and his vision of tacitknowledge represents knowing how as supposed to knowing that (Gerrans 2005). Bourdieu’snotion of strategy breaks with the objectivist point of view, and the notion of agentless actionthat is common within structuralism (Lamaison and Bourdieu 1986).

We have in our research explored the intersection between art and business. By involvingan aesthetic dimension to organizational research we are challenging the boundaries betweenart and business. Although there are geometrical and mathematical dimensions in our meth-odology, the approach is interpretive. All the dots and clusters in our figures are related toindividual actors. There are actors behind every geometrical expression and they can beinterpreted individually. Art in our study is interwoven in the enterprises that deal with art.Their relationship to art is not superfluous, facetious or merely purely artistic. The resultsbridge the gap between structure and agency. Actors in the cultural field are interacting andrelating to each other and are not merely part of a structure. We make a distinct contribution toart marketing, as art is reaching its audience in conjunction with the activities of the art actorswe have identified. Social inclusion is a central dimension of the cultural field. Consumptionof art provides meaning and identity and enhances the very definition of organizations that areengaged in the cultural field.

In our conceptualization of art marketing, art has become more accessible to people and innew contexts. Social inclusion, community development and urban regeneration take place asinvestors in art and make art more reachable within individuals’ habitus. By increasing theirsocial capital, individuals and enterprises evolve an aesthetic strategy. In this strategy, indi-viduals become agents of aesthetic expression and are not merely embedded in a new culturalstructure. When corporations use art, new consumers of art can be reached and businessesenhance their cultural and economic capital.

The fields of art and its relationship to economic capital is constantly evolving. Photogra-phy is, for instance, gaining a more prominent position within traditional art. In the Socialdefinition of photography, Bourdieu (1999) saw a development from the view of photographyas closely associated with relationships within the family. Family portraits dominated the earlyuse of photography as an artistic medium. Later, photography has risen within the ranks of fineart and is accepted as a form of artistic expression by many. Photography has become moretraditional and mainstream. We have followed the dynamics of the art field as investors in artand the art business field has developed. Artists and investors in art are more acutely aware ofthe economic dimensions of art. This tendency is likely to persist as more art is sold via theInternet and thereby has an electronic field of art rapidly developed. Cultural production inStockholm is becoming more accessible to a broader specter of society. A more computer-savvy audience is entering the art market. Politically, there has been a movement to accom-modate the new expressions of art not least that which is exhibited in the public domain. At thesame time the not-for-profit investors have been keen to embrace the former low brow arts.

With multiple correspondence analysis a field and its structures has been produced. Thefield, or rather a specimen of a field, of profit-oriented companies and their links to organi-zations on the production field of art as well as their links to the consumption field of art hasbeen produced. The field consists of three clusters or polarities. The first cluster of these threeconsists of the dominant, i.e. companies with large financial capital (turnover >5,000,000,000SEK) and large symbolic capital in the form of an early year of establishment (before 1935).These companies are also characterized with board members belonging to important networkssuch as membership in certain gentlemen’s clubs. Certain boards have members belonging to


both gentlemen’s clubs in Stockholm. Membership of these publically closed clubs providesboth access to informal networks and conveys a certain symbolic capital to the board and alsoto the company. This first polarity also includes directors stemming from financially recog-nized and established families as well recognized and established individuals or celebritiesfrom the world of business. These well-known people on the boards are likely to contributevaluable knowledge to the businesses that can be converted into clever decisions, but they alsocontribute to the symbolic capital, i.e. an aura to the board and thus to the company,contributing symbolic capital. This cluster is also associated with private ownership, whichmeans that companies predominantly have clear dominant private owners.

The next cluster consists of companies that, in this context, show an intermediateposition in terms of sales (51 million SEK ≤ turnover ≤5.000,000,000 SEK) and yearof establishment (1936–1990). These facts result in an intermediate position regardingeconomic capital. There are elements of club affiliation, membership is howeverdominated by the somewhat less exclusive club of the two. There are some well-known personalities among the directors within the boards of the companies of thissecond cluster. The directors’ club affiliation as well as elements of celebrities amongthe board members represents a symbolic capital. However, there are signs that thesymbolic capital is of a somewhat subordinate character compared with companies incluster one. Art possessions among the companies in the intermediate position numbertwo are traditional and modern art. These possessions consist of conventional art andthe companies participate on the field of consumption of art. However, there isnothing among these companies that identifies activity on the production field ofart, as could be found in cluster one with the relationship between the investmentbank Carnegie and its associate Carnegie Art Award on the production field of art.

Finally in cluster three, there are those companies dominated by low economic capital(turnover ≤50 million SEK) and low symbolic capital in the form of a late year of establish-ment (before 1990). Among the companies in this polarity of the dominated, there is mostprobably a number of companies that will gradually accumulate more financial capital and thusmove from at present a dominated position into a dominant one. These companies are referredto as challengers, as they challenge the existing incumbents. The striking thing about thedominant in cluster three is the absence of symbolic capital as recognized personalities on theboards. The relationships in this cluster with the production field of art is the Museum ofPhotography.

Given that some of the dominated companies will continue challenging the dominantcompanies both in the economic as well as in the cultural field regarding photography as alegitimate art form and in their art possessions, photography as an art form will no longer beassociated to dominated positions. Photography as an art form will thus possibly take a moreestablished position. It has already been successfully launched and substantial bodies alreadyexist for consecration such as the Museum of Photography and Bukowski for commercialsales. The economic field and the art field have usually been regarded as two very separate anddifferent fields. The art field’s logic is perceived as especially sensitive to contamination of thelogics of the economic field. With a possible closer cooperation and engagement or even aninter-dependency in the future, the so far distinct field logics will be less so. The economicfield is intense depending on the easy transformation of economic capital to other forms ofcapital, unlike cultural capital that requires a long-term accumulation of the non-material value.In the event of a rapprochement between the economic and the cultural fields, the economicfield has a potential of dominating the art field.


Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 InternationalLicense (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and repro-duction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide alink to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

References

Archer, M.S. 2000. Being human: The Problem of Agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Benson, R. 1999. Field theory in comparative context: A new paradigm for media studies. Theory and Society

28: 463–498.Biel-Missal, B. 2013. The atmosphere of the image: An aesthetic concept for visual analysis. Consumption,

Markets & Culture 16 (4): 356–367.Borg, E., and L. Vigerland. 2013. The co-production of value in an art market – Exploring service networks.

Journal of Investment and Management 2 (3): 57–69.Bourdieau, P. 1999. The social definition of photography. In Visual culture: The reader, ed. J. Evans and S. Hall.

London: Sage.Bourdieu, P. 1969. Intellectual field and creative project. Social Science Information 8 (3): 89–119.Bourdieu P. 1979. Symbolic Power. Critique of Anthropology 4 (13-14): 77–85.Bourdieu, P. 1983. The field of cultural production, or: The economic world reversed. Poetics 12: 311–356.Bourdieu, P. 1986a. Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. London: Routledge & Kegan.Bourdieu, P. 1986b. Kultursociologiska texter. Stockholm: Brutus Östlings bokförlag.Bourdieu, P. 1992. Texter om de intellektuella. Stockholm: Brutus Östlings bokförlag.Bourdieu, P., ed. 1993a. Critical perspectives. Polity Press: Cambridge.Bourdieu, P. 1993b. The field of cultural production. New York: Colombia University Press.Bourdieu, P. 1996a. The Rules of art. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Bourdieu, P. 1996b. Understanding. Theory, Culture and Society 13 (2): 17–37.Bourdieu, P. 1996c/1998. Homo Academicus, the state nobility: Elite schools in the field of power. Cambridge:

Polity Press.Bourdieu, P. 1996d. Homo Academicus. Stockholm: Brutus Östlings bokförlag.Bourdieu P. 1999. The Social Definition of Photography. In Visual Culture: The Reader, eds. J. Evans and S. Hall,

London: Sage.Bourdieu, P. 2000.Konstens regler: Det litterära fältets uppkomst och struktur. Stockholm: Brutus Östlings bokförlag.Bourdieu, P., and L.J.D. Wacquant. 1992. An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Broady, D. 1991. Sociologi och epistemologi: Om Pierre Bourdieus författarskap och den historiska

epistemologin. Stockholm: HLS Förlag.Callewaert, S. 2006. Bourdeau, critic of Foucault, the case of empirical social science against double-game-

philosophy. Theory, Culture & Society 26 (6): 73–98.Carnegie Art Award. 2015. www.carnegie.se/en/carnegie-art-award/about-the-carnegie-art-award/.Charters, S. 2006. Aesthetic products and aesthetic consumption: A review. Consumption, Markets & Culture 9

(3): 233–255.De Glas, F. 1998. Authors’ oeuvres as the backbone of publishers’ lists: Studying the literary publishing house

after Bourdieu. Poetics 25: 379–397.Fillis, I. 2002. Creative marketing and the art organisation: What can the artist offer? International Journal of

Nonprofit Voluntary Sector Marketing 7 (2): 131–145.Fotografiska. 2015. www.fotografiska.eu.Fowler, B. 1996. An Introduction to Pierre Bourdieu’s ‘understanding’, Theory. Culture and Society 13 (2): 1–16.Gerrans, P. 2005. Tacit knowledge, rule following and Pierre Bourdieu’s philosophy of social science.

Anthropological Theory 5 (1): 53–74.Giddens, A. 1984. The construction of society: Outline of the Treory of Structuralisation. Cambridge: Polity Press.Guillet de Monthoux, P. 2005. Mono management: A note on the insulant Antonin Artaud and his clients.

Culture and Organization 11 (4): 259–268.Gustavsson, M., M. Börjesson, and M. Edling. 2012. Konstens omvända ekonomi: Tillgångar inom utbildningar

1938–2008. Stockholm: Bokförlaget Daidalos.Hesmondhalgh, D. 2006. Bourdieu, the media and cultural production.Media, Culture and Society 28 (2): 211–231.Holt, D.B. 1997. Distinction in America? Recovering Bourdieu’s theory of tastes from its critics, Poetics 25: 93–120.Joy, A., and J.F. Sherry. 2004. Framing considerations in the PRC: Creating value in the contemporary Chinese

art market, Consumption. Markets & Culture 7 (4): 307–348.


http://www.carnegie.se/en/carnegie-art-award/about-the-carnegie-art-award/http://www.fotografiska.eu

Kerrigan, F., D. O’Reilly, and D. von Lehn. 2009. Producing and consuming arts: A marketing perspective,Consumption. Markets & Culture 12 (3): 203–207.

Konsten.net. 2012. www.konsten.net.Lamaison, P., and P. Bourdieu. 1986. From Rules to strategies: An interview with Pierre Bourdieu. Cultural

Anthropology 1 (1): 110–120.Le Roux, B., and H. Rouanet. 2004. Geometric data analysis: From correspondence analysis to structured data

analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Lenas, S. 2014. Carnegie Art Award försvinner. Dagens Nyheter.Lundin, S. 2005. Korrespondensanalys: Rapportering från en kurs. Uppsala: Pedagogiska institutionen, Uppsala

universitet.Merquior, J.G. 1985. Foucault. Berkeley: University of California Press.O’Hagan, J., and D. Harvey. 2000. Why do companies sponsor art events? Journal of Cultural Economics 24:

205–224.Özbilgin, M., and A. Tatli. 2005. Understanding Bourdieu’s contribution to organization and management

studies. Book Review, Academy of Management Studies 30 (4): 855–877.Robbins, D. 2002. Sociology and philosophy in the work of Pierre Bourdieu, 1965-75. Journal of Classical

Sociology 2 (3): 299–328.Schroeder, J.E. 2006. Aesthetic awry: The painter of light and the commodification of artistic values,

Consumption. Markets & Culture 9 (2): 87–99.Stockholm TT. 2014. Carnegie Art Award upphör.Strati, A., and P. Guillet deMonthoux. 2002. Introduction: Organizing aesthetics.Human Relations 55 (7): 755–766.Thompson, J.B. 1991. Editor’s Introduction, in: Pierre Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge:

Polity Press.Throop, C.J., and K.M. Murphy. 2002. Bourdieu and phenomenology, a critical assessment. Anthropological

Theory 2 (2): 185–207.Venkatesh, A., and L.A. Meamber. 2008. The aesthetics of consumption and the consumer as an aesthetic subject,

Consumption. Markets & Culture 11 (1): 45–70.Vigerland, L. 2007. Homo Domesticus: En marknadsanalys av bostadskonsumenters strategier och preferenser.

Doctoral dissertation. Stockholm: Företagsekonomiska institutionen, Stockholms universitet.Vilks.net. 2011. www.vilks.net.Wacquant, L.J.D. 1989. Towards a reflective sociology: Aworkshop with Pierre Bourdieu. Sociological Theory 7

(1): 26–63.

Lars Vigerland is Assistant Professor at the School of Business Studies at Södertörn University. Vigerland’sresearch focuses on marketing, networks and Swedish real estate. Vigerland is the director of the board of TheSwedish Carnegie Institute, a private, non-profit foundation promoting and conducting research on current issues.Vigerland also writes regular columns on the Swedish real estate market and he is on the Advisory Board of TheSwedish Housing Fund, an investment fund on the Swedish property market. Current research projects concernsnetworks within art and in financial markets.

Erik A. Borg is Professor of Business Administration at the Department of Social Sciences at SödertörnUniversity outside Stockholm in Sweden. He has held visiting positions at the University of Lund and at theGothenburg School of Economics, and has been Visiting Professor at Long Island University in New York.Professor Borg has published a wide range of scientific articles and books. He was educated at the United WorldCollege of the Atlantic, the London School of Economics and Stockholm University.


http://www.konsten.nethttp://www.vilks.net

Cultural Capital in the Economic Field: A Study of Relationships in an Art MarketAbstractIntroductionArts MarketingBourdieu’s Concepts of CultureThe Concepts of Field and CapitalMethodologyDataThe Anatomy of an Economic FieldThe Anatomy of a Cultural FieldSpecimen or Segments from an Economic Field and from a Cultural FieldConclusionsReferences

cultural capital in the economic field: a study of relationships in … · 2018. 6. 2. · cultural...

Documents